I cover the video game industry, write about gamers, and review video games.
You can follow me on Twitter and hit me up there if you have any questions or comments you'd like to chat about.
Disclosure: Many of the video games I review were provided as free review copies. This does not influence my coverage or reviews of these games.
I do not own stock in any of the companies I cover. I do not back any Kickstarter projects related to video games. I do not fund anyone in the industry on Patreon.

I came to this conclusion not while playing games on Xbox One or PS4, but while playing some older titles on my PC.

Many older games—titles that launched years ago, back when everyone gamed on those wonderful, gargantuan CRT monitors—have options for 1920 x 1080 (or 1080p) resolution. I have yet to find one that looks better than a modern game playing at 1280 x 720 (or 720p.)

Resolution, it turns out, is just one small factor among many when it comes to the final visual quality of a video game.

On a PC it matters a bit more—you’re only a couple feet from the screen.

On an HDTV sitting across the living room, resolution isn’t as crucial. Yes, pixels are spread out. Yes, native 1080p is better than upscaled 1080p. No, it’s not going to make that much of a difference unless you’re doing a side-by-side comparison.

Texture quality and anti-aliasing are far more important—the fidelity of all the little details, shadows and light, and so forth in a game. Contrast, jagged edges, smooth frame-rates.

Here, too, the PS4 has an advantage over the Xbox One. There’s no running from that fact: The PS4 has more graphical oomph than the Xbox One, plain and simple.

But will it really matter in the long-run?

As I’ve said previously, many gamers will neither know nor care about the resolutions on each system. Many will not be able to tell the difference unless they have both systems already.

On the other hand, if games continue to look significantly crisper on the PS4, Microsoft may face a messaging problem.

“Even if your average Joe doesn’t know or care how many lines of resolution a game is rendering, the narrative that “games are better on the PS4″ is proliferating quickly, and the sales numbers seem to back that up. When the next Madden and Call of Duty roll around, this kind of performance gap is only going to hurt the Xbox One.”

Of course, Madden and Call of Duty often sell better on Xbox platforms, and I doubt this is going to change overnight. But it could be a problem with other cross-platform games like the next Assassin’s Creed, Watch Dogs, and so forth.

On the other hand, titles like Wolfenstein: The New Order are already being confirmed at 1080p and 60fps on both PS4 and Xbox One, so we may already be witnessing a closing of the gap in that regard. I suspect the gap will continue to narrow, especially with cross-platform titles, while PS4 exclusives will continue to be the best-looking games on consoles.

In the end, it isn’t resolution that sells a system, it’s content. Since Microsoft can only do so much to bring its graphics in line with the PS4, the company will need to double down on creating must-have Xbox One IP.

This is where I think Microsoft is actually doing many things right this generation, with a wide variety of exclusives such as the fantasy world-building sandbox game Project Spark, the parkour action title Sunset Overdrive, and the weird time-stopping game Quantum Break on the horizon—all very different titles from the usual shooters we associate with the Xbox brand such as Halo and Gears of War.

(I sometimes think Microsoft should put together a major JRPG studio just to see if they could make a real push into the Japanese market, if only for the thrill of a new challenge.)

Of course, Sony isn’t standing idly by either, with plenty of its own compelling first-party games in the pipelines, from inFamous: Second Son to The Order: 1886 and a new Uncharted.

And this is the reason I don’t care about resolution discrepancies. I want the real fight to take place in the realm of content, to see the Big Three console makers duke it out by making the very best games possible, rather than simply engage in a pissing contest over pixel counts. The Wii U isn’t as powerful as the Xbox One or PS4 either, but the games on that system have been consistently fantastic and, to be honest, look terrific too.

But if we’ve learned anything over the past few years it’s that good-looking games don’t equate to actually good, fun-to-play, well-designed games. Too often that sleek exterior is masking a rather hollow experience.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

I’m not sure if this is confirmed for a future Xbox update or not but I have seen on reddit that MS is considering transferring 8% GPU power from the 10% Kinect uses which would help the cause of graphic difference. I 100% agree with you though Erik that resolution isn’t the biggest of deals because if the game sucks the frame rate doesn’t matter. It might be the best looking game in the world but if the combat stinks or the story is like FF XIII 3 where it makes no sense at all what do you gain? Also resolution varies on your TV set. If you get a low end Best Buy brand HDTV opposed to a high end SamSung you will see a much clearer picture on the Samsung obviously.

With the performance difference between the PS4 and Xbox One, the only way the “gap” will be closed is if developers start holding PS4 version back to the lowest common denominator of the Xbox One. Otherwise, we’re going to continue seeing better resolutions and better framerate on the PS4 versions of games. Microsoft’s main problem is that it’s more expensive for a technically inferior machine. That’s the word that’s getting around and people are choosing what they perceive is the better value.

How is the Xbox One technically inferior? From everything I’ve read there is one thing the PS4 is better at than the Xbox One, which is graphics. But there is a whole list of things the Xbox One can do that the PS4 can’t and likely never will be able to. So from my perspective the PS4 is technically inferior.

This article is discussing the graphical difference between the PS4 and Xbox One so of course when I say technically inferior, I’m referencing the graphical horsepower of the systems. Why would I be comparing any other features in response to an article about graphical differences? It would have zero bearing on the subject we are discussing.

Technically inferior? Every single aspect of the Xbox one is superior other than graphics card and RAM, and from what I understand Microsoft has the superior APU which will make even the aforementioned relatively negligible in the future. And Microsoft is simply better at coding, even vs google and apple, if you don’t believe me look at benchmarks and demos even weaker devices with Microsoft operating systems tend to outperform and crash less. On top of all this Microsoft has BY FAR better servers and services (Xbox Live), and even at this early stage you can tell they are using cloud power quite well (forza, titanfall). Idk about all of you but I can’t stand lag online especially in an FPS so this is very important to me. I had friends who said same things about ps4 they have both switched to Xb1 since, even some of their games lagged a bit (inconsistent frame rates). Also, ps4 is littered with little kids. And last but not least, hate on the new Kinect all you want, but I promise if you had it for a week and went back to ps4 you’d be like wtfm8, how do I party instantly and record game play without skipping a beat, and that’s not the half of it as far as Kinect goes. I have to also touch on exclusives, ok enough said we all know whose exclusives are better.

I understand what the author is saying here. In the end, resolution doesn’t matter. However, when I am buying any piece of technology, whether it be a game console, a blu-ray player, or anything else, I’m always going to do some research and end up buying whichever is the most powerful. Others like me, who are not biased toward wither Microsoft or Sony will most likely do the same thing; and will end up buying a PS4, especially since it is also $100 less expensive. That being said, the power of the console didn’t end up effecting my decision to buy a PS4. I bought it because I’ve already owned a PS1, a PS2, and a PS3 (I still have all three), so why would I turn Microsoft now? I also think that Sony has better exclusives. The fact that the PS4 is more powerful is simply the proverbial icing on the cake.

So if I may ask, what are the “exclusive” games that are better? Tho I will admit, both consoles are good. Xbox being 100 bucks more but not as powerful than the PS4, Frankly, both are HD tho, Sure one is a lower HD than the other but both are HD, So yea, what are the Exclusives you are talking about, because frankly, I don’t know of any games out on the PS4 that are actually good yet.

The main problem with this generation is power is all the consoles have. Unless you take in to account the Wii which for some reason is absent from this article. Both systems are using the same basic hardware, with the Xbox One’s APU having a 30% weaker graphics chip. Every game that runs on the Xbox One could run on the PS4, and have better graphics, higher framerate, more AA, and AF.

It’s just really bizarre that last gen people were comparing the PS3 and Xbox One’s resolutions and some news sites were saying the Xbox 360 was better because it could handle some games at 720p while the PS4 was stuck at 640p. Both consoles were fairly even last generation too.

This generation the Xbox One is around 40% weaker and more expensive, and suddenly the difference between 1080p and 720p/900p is not noticeable or important as 720p/640p from last gen.

Spot-on column. There is no right or wrong choice between consoles. It’s a matter of style versus substance and your personal preference. Minecraft is a perfect example. And while it is easy to spot the difference between a 720p and a 1080P screenshot when you’re looking for it as long as there is no detriment to the gameplay what am I really missing? Aesthetically speaking I would argue that a smoother frame rate is more important than the 720v1080 resolution debate.

The reason people get fixated on graphics is because they have been told it is all important for the last twenty odd years.

Now its come back to haunt the industry.

Poetic justice methinks…

One of the reasons the Wii U has had problems is that they discovered that takes a hell of a lot longer to make games in HD than they expected. The XB1 is having problems because it is seen as being less powerful…in the graphics department.

(Not that this is the extent of the problems both console are having of course)

The other problem is that these nice shiny graphics require so much disk space you end up using half of it up just for three or four games. This makes a high speed internet connection a requirement, which not everyone has or can afford, and also makes downloading somewhat less attractive. Not just because of the time needed to download but also because you end up having to decide which of the limited number of games you happen to have on the drive you are going to get rid of when something new comes out. At least with physical copies you can install quickly, easily and if you want to remove that game you can either keep the disk around in case you want to play that game again at some point. Or of course you can trade it in.

Are you sure about that? True, no one has been hit by lightning nor have any board rooms been struck by a random meteor. But several of the larger companies in the industry are having problems which, when you come down to it, are a result of hubris.

EA has managed to release a stream of badly received titles, ‘winning’ a golden poo two years running. (Can they make it a hat (pant?) trick?). Microsoft is seeing poor sales, or at least a lot lower than they expected or predicted, not just for the X Box One but across most if not all of their consumer products. Nintendo has seen such poor sales for the Wii U that they would have been better served selling an empty box – which might have been used more in many homes.

In all three cases the problems are self inflicted ones, and basically a result of the companies in question trying to dictate what the market wanted and assuming that their name would allow them to get away with doing so.

The only real difference here is that the self-inflicted injury has been caused by the industry as a whole, and is affecting the industry as a whole. Even Sony, which is one of the few companies to avoid any serious missteps in recent years, was involved in inflicting this wound and is going to suffer from this.

Now I’m not saying that there is anything wrong with better graphics, nor that we should ignore them. But we have this tendency to concentrate on graphics to the exclusion of all else, and the reason we do so is purely because that is what the industry has been telling us is important. If you look at any discussion between various platforms, and not just this generation of consoles, graphics usually get mentioned first and everything else second. Even back in the days of the Sega Megadrive (Genesis in North America) and the Super Nintendo graphics were always the first things people talked about. Rarely did you hear anyone pointing out that the old SNES controller was so small you ended up with hand cramps if you used it for more than five minutes. You’d think that the marginally better graphics on the SNES would be somewhat less important than having to put the controller down every few minutes to swear loudly while you tried to shake the cramp out.

There is a lot of discussion about ways the gaming industry is falling apart, or on the verge of a massive collapse. But no one seems to see that the underlying problems are not new, and were all created by the industry itself.

The connections between the gaming press and developers for example, which brings the question as to how impartial reviews really are, are a result of the way the developers were able to control/blackmail ‘journalists’ before the internet came along. This is starting to cause problems because people are starting to drift away from the established review sites and publications (one of the reasons you have so many people reading the games section of Forbes).

In the case of graphics it is causing problems for everyone. Even if you leave out resolution and processing power, the problem is that all those nice graphics are what take up practically all of the space needed for a modern game. And the size is what causes problems for the platforms as they need increasingly larger (and more expensive) drives. It also causes problems for developers because it is those graphics that take the most time and money to create, and therefore are the major reason why development costs for modern games is starting to rival that of big budget Hollywood films. It is probably also why people complain that modern games lack ‘depth’. Its not that developers don’t understand the idea of having a good story, it is that the people involved are used to thinking about how a game looks and have little experience with story telling or game play.

What is going to matter in the long run is the performance/cost of the PS4 versus the Xbox One. The Xbox One is $100 more for lesser performance, and yes that matters, especially as Grant mentioned, that word of mouth continues to inform on that.

However, I do believe that resolution does matter, and comparing old games at 1080p versus new ones at 720p is a bit silly. Lets compare instead AC:Black Flag on the PS4 at release which was 900p, and after the patch that enabled 1080p native. On a 50 inch tv about 10 feet away it was immediately noticeable, as Ship ropes and edges didnt have the stair stepping effect that the 900p had, and everything appeared crisper and sharper.

I can easily see what games are 1080p native versus not on my PS4, and comparing the Xbox One would be even more so.

Also, the new Wolfenstein running at 1080p/60fps on Xbox One is great, but it was never a question that the Xbox could do it. The question is whether they had to make concessions in lighting, textures, polygons, antialising, tessellation, and filtering to achieve that res and framerate. The other side of that is did they gimp the PS4 version to match or are they taking advantage of the PS4′s extra power?

The original Xbox had a game that ran at 1080p called Dragon’s Lair 3D. It ran at that high res which was amazing for that time, but the game was so simple in it’s design that it didnt need much to get it there. 1080p is not the be all end all, but it really is the better option over upscaled and to those who have eyes that see sharp details, very noticeable. 60FPS is only useful in fast action, racing, and especially multiplayer games, and I don’t even play at 60fps all the time on PC.

I think it’s hard to make a factual statement that the Xbox One has “lesser performance” than the PS4 as a broad generalization, as you’ve made.

Yes, the PS4 might currently be more powerful on the graphics side, but that’s it. The Xbox One can do so much more than the PS4 will ever be able to do. And that’s the reason the PS4 is less expensive, because it’s less capable overall.

I really do hope that Microsoft’s push for these new and experimental titles pays off and that they put more effort into new ideas later down the line rather than pushing for a ridiculous number of sequels to these games. Right now the difference may not be that big, but later on in the generation developers are going to have to start using anti-aliasing and other tricks again on consoles while PCs keep moving forward. Microsoft can get people to continue to pay attention to Xbox One by focusing on securing and/or developing exclusive IPs despite the difference in power between the two consoles becoming more apparent as time goes on.

The exclusives that Sony has right now are Uncharted and inFamous, two sequels, and The Order: 1886, which has the word “Cinematic” used to describe it way too many times with too little gameplay footage available, which makes me worried about exactly how much gameplay there actually is.

I’m planning on getting both systems this gen, but right now the games that MS is putting money into look more interesting.